The ridiculously false Steele Dossier was weaponized to help spy on the Trump team and to undermine him in media.
It was used by a lot of media for the last two-plus years to attack President Donald Trump and to ‘prove’ his collusion with Russia, leading who knows how many people to believe it.
This, despite the fact that the information was compiled by Chris Steele who had a known bias against Trump and the dossier was paid for by the DNC and the Clinton team through Fusion GPS. It was basically a bunch of gossip assembled by Steele, paid for by Democrats, to undermine Trump.
Yet most of liberal media never questioned it.
Not to mention that things were out and out debunked, like Michael Cohen’s trip to Prague. And the Mueller report confirmed that including the allegations were complete hogwash.
Now, finally the New York Times is acknowledging that the main dossier claims were false.
From Daily Wire:
“[T]he release on Thursday of the report by the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, underscored what had grown clearer for months — that while many Trump aides had welcomed contacts with the Russians, some of the most sensational claims in the dossier appeared to be false, and others were impossible to prove. Mr. Mueller’s report contained over a dozen passing references to the document’s claims but no overall assessment of why so much did not check out,” the Times reported.
Um, maybe it didn’t check out because of the bias, being gossip, opposition research and fed to them by the Russians who have no reason to be truthful?
And it seems that the NY Times may even get that last point:
Another possibility — one that Mr. Steele has not ruled out — could be Russian disinformation. That would mean that in addition to carrying out an effective attack on the Clinton campaign, Russian spymasters hedged their bets and placed a few land mines under Mr. Trump’s presidency as well.
Last year, in a deposition in a lawsuit filed against Buzzfeed, Mr. Steele emphasized that his reports consisted of unverified intelligence. Asked whether he took into account that some claims might be Russian fabrications, he replied, “Yes.”
F.B.I. agents considered whether Russia had polluted the stream of intelligence, but did not give it much credence, according to the former official.
But that is an issue to which multiple inquiries are likely to return. There has been much chatter among intelligence experts that Mr. Steele’s Russian informants could have been pressured to feed him disinformation.
And even the FBI was suspicious of the dossier, according to the Times:
The FBI, according to the Times, appears to have been suspicious of the dossier since early 2017. That, however, was right around the time media outlets reported on the existence of the dossier – and Buzzfeed published the unverified document in a breach of journalistic ethics – and so the fact that the FBI doubted the dossier’s credibility was never part of the story.
Now it will be investigated – after all the damage it caused. Thanks, Democrats and media.
The dossier will now be the subject of at least two inquiries – one from congressional Republicans and one from the Department of Justice’s Inspector General, who is looking into whether the FBI improperly relied on the propaganda document to obtain a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court warrant to spy on Trump adviser Carter Page.
Most who were skeptical to begin with were critical of the NY Times coming late to the party.